Last week, the U.S. government announced that it will help provide $18 billion to finance a 500-mile pipeline needed to bring crude oil from the northwest to refineries in the south.
Wait?? Didn’t the Obama Administration just deny TransCanada the permit needed to build Keystone XL after seven years of consideration? Are they now doing an about-face?
Unfortunately not. President Obama didn’t have a change of heart. The pipeline project in question is actually in Kenya. The Administration announced that the U.S. government will be spending American tax dollars to help finance the project.
You read that correctly: the Administration is willing to spend billions of American tax dollars to build a crude oil pipeline in another country overseas. Yet, they still remain opposed to a private company investing in a pipeline project in the U.S.; one that would bring much needed jobs and stable supplies of energy to America.
Monday’s Wall Street Journal opinion editorial titled Keystone No, Kenya Pipeline Yes (pp. A14) highlights the Obama Administration’s hypocrisy and raises the important question “What’s with the double standard on pipelines?”
Recall that the principle reason for Obama Administration’s rejection of the Keystone project was the need to prevent future GHG emissions and for the U.S. to be perceived as credible global leaders on efforts to reduce climate change. From the Department of State’s Record of Decision and National Interest Determination rejecting the Keystone XL permit application:
- “In short, the extent to which the United States takes action and is understood to be a leader is directly correlated to the Unites States effectiveness in encouraging other countries to step up and take strong action on climate change.”
- “While the proposed (KXL) Project by itself is unlikely to significantly impact the level of GHG-intensive extraction of oil sands crude or the continued demand for heavy crude oil at refineries in the United States, it is critical for the United States to prioritize actions that are not perceived as enabling further GHG emissions globally.”
- “These economic benefits are meaningful, but in the assessment of the Secretary of State, they do not outweigh the fact that an approval would undermine the Unites States successful foreign policy engagement in efforts to combat climate change on a global scale.”
Even though greenhouse gas emissions are obviously a global issue, apparently none of that applies to projects in Kenya.
One cannot arrive at any conclusion other than that the Obama Administration has a double standard when it comes to crude oil pipeline projects. In the real world where jobs and energy security matter – and not just “perceptions” – supporting an oil pipeline in Kenya only reinforces the fact that the President’s decision to deny Keystone XL was purely political and wrong for America.